Just curious to people's thoughts here. My previous 7.1 setup used all QS8s. I'm working on a new theater room, planning on 7.2.2 with two of the new in ceiling speakers from Axiom. There's quite a debate over at 'the other forum' over dipole/tripole surrounds vs direct firing. Some folks feel like modern movies have discrete channels now, that Atmos is creating it's own 'imaging' by placing sound objects in space and that diffuse sounding surrounds may disrupt that imaging.

Atmos - direct firing. That is how it is designed, and why they are "matrixing" the overhead sounds with the front channels (they are direct) and not surrounds (which can be direct, or bi/di/quad pole).

That is it in a nutshell, and for people with the attention span of a squirrel (not you, but some of the other rascals around here).

For more information, keep reading....

That is the biggest problem that experts are saying the speakers with an "Atmos module" on top of them has... It takes a direct speaker, plops it on top of your mains or even surrounds, and then bounces it off the ceiling. By then, it is so diffused that they don't think that you will get very accurate object placement in space.

Wait a couple of weeks. I am going to CEDIA. I already have some Atmos demos scheduled. So far the premiere setups (which most of them fall into this area) are talking about direct firing only. The less-than-premiere manufacturers are showing their "Atmos enabled" front speakers a lot, which are still direct firing speakers. I can give a report back on the speaker tech used for that.

If I had the cash, and if I was sticking with Axiom, I would get their new in-ceiling M3 speakers (4 of them if I am going to do it) and a serious receiver (have to be 11.2 to get me my 7.2.4 that I would want). Unfortunately, that is WAY more cabbage than I can spend.

I have an 8' ceiling comprised of acoustically absorbent 2'x'2 tiles. The seating is about 9-10' from the television. Here is the idea that I am kicking around, and I would love any feedback.

My plan was to re-purpose my M22s by placing them horizontally atop of the 6' oak entertainment towers. The speaker cabinet/s of the M22s is slightly angled, which when laid on their side, would place the drivers on a slight angle toward the ceiling. While I am unsure as to if the angle will be sufficient (which I will be able to easily modify), I am more curious as to how well (or poorly) the ceiling will reflect overhead audio. It is my hope that the ceiling tiles will reflect a sufficient amount of the sound, and perhaps help to diffuse it a bit.

Sorry, I mis-read that. Surround channels aren't the primary "non-Atmos" channels used for creating the object placement. It is created, at least in its current upcoming version, via the front channels and overhead speakers.

Who knows what the future will hold, but since your ears face forward, the idea is that you won't be able to detect audio points in space behind your ears, and thus the surround channels won't matter if they are direct or di/bi/quad pole.

What you are getting from AVS is people's personal preference for their existing surround speakers, regardless and outside of an Atmos implementation.

With that said, and yes I do love having four QS8 surrounds, I have always wondered about switching to direct speakers instead of the QS8s for surrounds. Not because anything is wrong with the QS8s, but I feel that from my front row of seats, the rear surrounds are "too diffused" by the time that they hit that row, and that is the row that I sit in... Yes, it is all about me.

Again, I will report back as to what I see & hear, and what I can learn from talking to the Dolby Atmos guys themselves in person in 2 weeks when I am at CEDIA.

Spence, my thoughts are that the Atmos design is best implemented by directly downward firing speakers in the ceiling. The alternative of using vertically upward firing speakers(which some makers will supply)on or near the mains may give a reasonable effect which would be influenced strongly by the nature of the ceiling construction. As Dr. Toole has pointed out with respect to the importance of having first reflections remain as similar as possible to the direct sound(suggesting a hard flat surface would be best at the relevant reflection points), so a hard reflective ceiling would appear to be desirable from the standpoint of the Atmos effects.

The acoustic tiles in the ceiling would both reduce the level of the output from the Atmos channels(the amount dependent on the NRC, noise reduction co-efficient, of the tiles in question)and would alter the relative frequency content of the reflections. So, it wouldn't appear to be a very favorable surface for supporting the Atmos effects.

Having said all that, what you propose would have little or no expense and little complexity in making the installation. Setting the M22s at an angle to fire almost vertically at the ceiling(not simply relying on the angled side surface)can be tried to see if even the less than optimal result is still worthwhile in your view.